Friday, May 08, 2009

Four approaches to dark matter

As J. Duffield once pointed out, people often say, gravitational anomalies are evidence for dark matter, but they aren’t. Dark matter is a hypothesis that attempts to explain the evidence. The evidence is the gravitational anomaly, instead. The dark matter phenomena can be explained in context of existing theories at least four ways, which appear nearly equivalent phenomenologically. The another approach, based on dispersion in particle field based is illustrated here:
  1. The simplest explanation of dark matter (DM) is based on AWT, by which every gravity field is a result of density gradient of Aether. At the case of massive bodies the highest density gradient exists just at the surface of massive object. This density gradient is a source of additional weak gravity field of negative curvature, which attracts and collects the particles of negative surface too, the particles of antimatter in particular - which is one of the ways, in which such interpretation of DM may be tested.

    From AWT follows, the idea of gravitational singularity of general is conceptually wrong, as every high curvature of Aether density would manifests like another source of matter density, which would balance the singularity at the center. This is a direct consequence of gradient driven reality (i.e. the fact, nature doesn't like jumps and steps).

  2. Another explanation may be based on general relativity in connection to mass-energy equivalence. We can consider again, maximal curvature of space-time of every massive object exists at the surface of this object. This curvature is equivalent to energy density of space-time, which is equivalent to mass density by E=mc^2 formula (this approach was formalized by J. Bekenstein and Rudi V. Nieuwenhove recently.) This additional mass density balances the curvature of the space-time, which has caused gravity field originally.

    Note that large space-time curvature at the surface of massive object will lead to violation of buoyancy condition, because mass/energy density may become higher here, then at the center of massive object - which would lead to undulations of space-time and indeterministic quantum mechanics behavior - so it suggests a route, how to implement quantum gravity solution, at least locally.

  3. Another model of dark matter may be based on general relativity and concept of omnidirectional Universe expansion. The Lense-Thirring effect is based on constant speed of energy spreading in curved space-time, which leads to reference frame dragging. If we introduce an omnidirectional space-time expansion, it will be pronounced the more, the more the space-time is curved already. This will gradually lead to freezing of energy spreading in expanding space-time, which will therefore move like single body from distant observer perspective. For example, Pioneer anomaly is based on acceleration, which is proportional to product of Hubble constant and speed of light. It can serve as an indicia, the limited speed of light and omnidirectional expansion of space-time itself is sufficient for explanation of dark matter behavior.

    The surface-tension model of AWT is still more intuitive here, though: we can imagine, the gravity field of galaxy behaves like single giant water droplet, the surface of which is behaving like water surface. And energy spreads always slower at the water surface, then through underwater or above the surface. It means, at surface layer of every gradient of gravity field the light or gravity spread in slower speed, then at the bulk. The space-time moves here like more dense and rigid body, which we can observe by rotational curves of individual stars at the galactic boundaries.
  4. The most abstract explanation of dark matter phenomena may be based on pure geometry of omnidirectional space-time expansion, where the volume of every area of space-time increases faster, then its surface. Because geometry of energy spreading is given by Lagrangian (which follows from diffusional Aether model on background), the energy spreading through bulk (via longitudinal waves) switches itself into surface spreading (via transversal waves) in less or more distant perspective - thus creating a new reference frame, because human creatures can consider only surface transversal waves in causal energy spreading at distance.
The problem of math models is, they become poorly conditioned, when large number of parameters or postulates is involved. As we can see, even qualitative models may lead to similar results here - so it may be difficult to distinguish between then. The increasing number of various theories becomes a brake of the intersubjective understanding of reality, after then - which isn't quite accidental here, because dark matter is a quantum gravity phenomena and a manifestation of hidden dimensions of space-time. We cannot have a formal model of gravity based on quantum mechanics, while retaining full determinism of general relativity. Mainstream physics was trapped in determinism of consecutive logics, on which formal math is based.


Anonymous said...

I find this article with such a high density of abstract concept, linked to hyper-complex visions of reality. My intelectual gradient is not enough to tunelize trough the solid-thick wall of quantum meaniness of each phrase, less the whole relative article itself.
But I did enjoy the concept of leveling the surface of space time by e=mc^2. thanks

Zephir said...

Dark matter naturally emerges even in human society, whenever high gradient of energy density (expressed in money density in particular) emerges.

For example the religion or concept of global warming and greenhouse effects are politized, because of theirs macroeconomical impacts. Therefore it's not so strange, every significant idea here build its own camp of opponents, every significant camp of opponents creates a significant camp of counter-opponents, and so on.

In biology we can met with parasites and symbionts in analogy to dark matter: every sucessfull species hosts its own specialized parasites, who are hosting their own specialized subparasites, and so on..

As all these creature are attracted by money or energy, their mutual influence overgrows from parabiosis into complex forms of symbiosis (for example the mutual relation of paparazzis and superstars) by the same way, like the isolated streaks of dark matter around isolated gallaxies change into continuous foam at large space-time level.

Zephir said...

I don't know, if all these concepts are abstract - in my opinion it's natural consequence of gradient driven reality, which describes quite common things.

For example electron orbitals are just supersymmetrical clouds around atom nuclei by the same way, like the gluon coat around hadrons from this perspective, so we should try to postulate a common description of all these phenomena.

Zephir said...

See for example "The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity". On page 185 Einstein says "the energy of the gravitational field shall act gravitationally in the same way as any other kind of energy". But such relationship was never inserted into Einstein's field equations because of complexity of resulting solution. It was only partially considered in work of Cartan, Yilmaz, Heim, Moffat and others. The fact, Einstein's was aware of this consequence of relativity we can demonstrate further by famous Einstein’s 1920 Leyden lecture, where he talks about the stress-energy of space itself, and says its inhomogeneous: ".. the recognition of the fact that "empty space" in its physical relation is neither homogeneous nor isotropic.."